Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    July 27, 2013 7:00am-7:31am PDT

7:00 am
project. i think we're already doing much better. the mta before i got there had in -- initiated this and the changes were implemented so there is a lot we're doing internally. there are still external factors that impact the deliverability of projects. we're a heavy process town. i know you get these issues at this committee and there is engagement in the process and sometimes it spreads the timeline of projects. the ceqa process -- some of the work we're doing requires a full eir and can take two years and the ceqa process can be in the way
7:01 am
as well so we're trying to be effective and smart in planning for the ceqa process and the community engagement is effective but there is factors outside of what we can manage as an industry that impact the timelines but it's something we're focused on and want to make sure whatever resources we have whether from the federal government, the state government or regionally or locally we put them into the ground and benefit the transportation system directly. >> i appreciate your focus on this. we had so many transit related projects from market street to the subway and various other projects where initial deadlines and budgets slip and i appreciate your focus on this. to the extent of all of the projects we can continue to publicly put our goals out, put our schedules out, and budgets out and when we slip know there
7:02 am
is real accountability in the departments. anything that you can do to provide more transparency and accountability would deal with the frustration that the public and many of us feel with the projects that don't meet the deadlines. >> understood and with the capital improvement committee and we are looking at that and better initially nail down the scope which comes a realistic budget and timeline so we can properly set the public expectations like the library and hospital projects and the rec and park projects. >> thank you. >> and just a -- i guess we are tag teaming today and follow up on the issue of project delivery. i mean -- i will be the first to advocate that as
7:03 am
important as our political process is that at times we allow the political process to go on with no end in sight and repeat itself and decisions never become public and shown with the major drama around a modest piece of ceqa legislation that i sponsored and that we just passed -- thank you colleagues. it's a hard issue, but beyond ceqa and process issues i know there has been some discussion about the mta's own process or multi-designs of process that some agencies don't have and maybe could use another look, and i am also glad to hear about the renewed top level management focus on moving capital projects through the mta, so i really want to encourage that. it's been my
7:04 am
experience on some projects at least things don't move as quickly within the mta as they need to but just so you don't think we're picking on the mta president chiu and i had an interesting discussion at a transportation authority -- excuse me, finance committee meeting the other day about funding for the geary bus rapid transit project which is not to the mta yet and it's been 10 years i think, and i know we expressed a lot of frustration and we put a funding item out with a negative recommendation and we're sending a strong message to the ta and not acceptable to have the projects move along at a snail's pace so i think it's a group effort to look at the agency's processes and all of the public processes and how can we move forward with these projects in a timely
7:05 am
matter. >> agreed. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i wanted to thank supervisor wiener for the last project and important to look at internal processes and one issue that came up in the ceqa process that we heard from one of the developers and not the appeals but making determinations were prioritized and figuring out internally on the front end the city could do a better job to make sure things move forward and i believe public input is important part of the process but other things that we could do to expedite it would be important and the board wanted to ensure 100% bike and pedestrian safety improvements as well and ways that we can
7:06 am
improve the processes. >> yeah, i appreciate that and as i mentioned at least for transportation projects work with the planning department and the environmental and we understand the requirements and they get the information so the public has the information and that process can be effective. i guess what i would add finally we focused a lot on the money side of things and then on the project delivery side of things, but a big chunk of what we need to do to make transportation work here in san francisco work better is going to bring forward some difficult decisions on how we allocate space in the public right-of-way and i made reference to this. in order to make muni work better we need more dedicated space from muni. in order to put in a level of bike infrastructure and safety improvements there is trade off with parking and traffic lanes, and not only do we need the
7:07 am
funds to implement but we need the political support to stand behind the transit first policy and those difficult public space allocation decisions so that we request be effective in improving transportation in san francisco. >> thank you very much mr. reiskin. i appreciate the presentation and i should say we have been joined by supervisors mar and campos for subsequent items so we will now open it up for public comment. i have five public comment cards. public comment will be two minutes. [calling speaker names] you can come up. doesn't have to be in the same order that i called you. okay. are none of those five here? okay. is there any -- oh jane morrison
7:08 am
and jim lazarus too. we will start with jane morrison. >> [inaudible] >> okay. great. >> well, my main concern about public transit is if we build those proposed high rise buildings on piers 30-32 a lot of [inaudible] needed there and takes it away from the rest of the city so i know there is a fontana went up in 1961 and a candidate jack morrison saw that and felt it was cutting off the view of the waterfront and worked as a supervisor in 62 to get a height limit there along the waterfront and that way people could always see across the port on the water
7:09 am
waterfront and that passed and still in effect and i called the department and still have the height limit and piers 30-three they are building a high rise and they have to change the rules and i hope you don't change the rules but that is the issue. if we do there is a lot of muni required there and take it away from people all over the city to provide the muni that they need to go up and down the waterfront, so i think that's my main concern. what else did i write on here? well, i think we need to -- a lot of concern about that and i hope that you will say no to the development of piers 30-32. the warriors -- it maybe was mentioned and only play 40 games a year there and really not for them and high rise development and i hope that can you change that. >> thank you very much.
7:10 am
mr. lazarus before we get to you ms. hyatt is here and i didn't see you or i would have had you come up. >> thank you. rachel hyatt with the transportation authority and just wanted to add we have been working closely with the planning department and mta and other operators that touch the san francisco transportation system, bart, cal train over the last few years. on the san francisco transportation plan so one of the authority's responsibilities as congestion management agency is address these issues about long-term transportation needs, both existing needs as they continue into the future as well as the new needs that result of growth and balance projected revenues towards meeting existing needs,
7:11 am
future needs from growth, and the variety of goals that we have, state of good repair, environmental health, visibility and safety goals. the growth projections that the planning department presented -- we worked closely with them to use them in the travel demand forecasting mod and he will that provides the forecast of system performance and impacts on growth and travel patterns that mta present earlier. we use those to forecast needs and how investment alternateives in the system and meeting the goals and we work with mta and the task force on the revenue strategy part of this work, so we appreciate the coordination, as well as --
7:12 am
also appreciate the remarks about the need for the policy issues, the project delivery on the large capital project side and the small project side and some things we found on the topic were consistent with what mr. reiskin mentioned and we look forward to doing whatever we can and make progress on the policy issues. >> thank you very much. okay. mrs. dearman and i think we have the other microphone there that you can move lower. >> this one? >> yeah, right there. >> i love it when i am on opposite side. in support and i am against it. we do not need anything on the waterfront. you're too young child. are you 20 years old yet? oh you're a
7:13 am
woman after my own heart, but you know we got to -- we just can't have any -- don't let the warriors put -- i just don't want you to change the waterfront because i mean -- but i'm an old lady. i have virgin hair though. for those that don't know what virgins are undyed or -- and i don't want you to change the waterfront because the warriors -- let them play in oakland because oakland wants them; right? but they want you to change the waterfront for them, so please don't do that. you see i can't even walk but my heart is in the right place.
7:14 am
right jim? >> you bet. >> okay. >> thank you mrs. dearman. okay. mr. lazarus and let me call -- i an additional card. go ahead. >> thank you supervisors and congratulations on supervisor chiu's engagement. the chambers work closely with members of the board, with supervisor wiener, with the department on a variety of revenue ideas to move forward mta's mission to provide effective transit for the city. as was mentioned earlier today the chamber is a co-sponsor with the labor council allowing the state law to move forward next year with the vehicle license fee and we concur with the comments from supervisors today trsportad tos focused on
7:15 am
our own polling says the only way it passes it's tied to other charter amendment or ballot that directing the funding to transportation. whether we look at general obligation bonds, whether we look at the transit fare system that we use and the commitments both in new money and items such as moving expenses away from muni and its share of the current general fund, the cal train dollars that we need to put in with the counties and are there county solutions to get muni money back to miewn and he fund cal train in a different way and the subsidy it needs and lastly don't forget the expense side. we worked hard on management of muni and employee relations a couple years ago and i don't think we have seen the fruit of that process either yet so together i think there are a lot of ways on revenues and expenses
7:16 am
to solve some of the shortcomings in transit. thank you. >> thank you mr. lazarus. so the other speaker card thases i called. [calling speaker names] >> good afternoon. i am mr. shakuda and comments in regard to the transportation needs so first of all i follow the one bay area plan which is the regional plan in regards to housing needs for the whole region, and i think one of the problems is that the city keeps on volunteering for excess of housing location to get the transportation money, and i believe our volunteer numbers -- we're volunteering -- they want 90,000 units up until i think
7:17 am
2040 and while the problem is as shown in the eastern neighborhood plan which ken rich was in charge of i think he or some of the others said that the increase in property taxes -- that type of thing is no where near the cost of the infrastructure that new development causes, so but the city asking and more housing and we're so far behind in the hole in regards to muni funding it's a deeper hole to get into. the more housing the more maintenance that we need. we're just falling deeper, deeper, deeper, so i can't understand why we would allow auto planning department is doing a great job in planning housing units but in the meantime
7:18 am
muni is falling behind and we shouldn't have more housing until we have transportation and we're no where near that so please fix muni first before we get more housing. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is is ms. tarbox and i am speaking on behalf of the san francisco water alliance and we're concerned about the whole corridor and from the embarcadero station to pier 70. as we have heard today the funding problems with muni already exist and in the arena is built on piers 30-32 transit problems on the water corridor will increase. in order to provide services for the estimated 2 million extra people coming into the south beach area and 250 new events a year in
7:19 am
addition to the already 80 plus giant games the city will have to add additional vehicles and expand the over capacity platforms at the embarcadero station, brannan, and king street. it's already inadequate to cover existing service needs and the capital and incremental costs in provides service for the warrior's arena will literally crimel muni. the owners should be made to pay for the cost caused by the developments and the demand to service. these funds should be front ended and not paid over time and the board of supervisors should seek guarantee of payments in the upcoming term sheet. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> my name is john parish and the vice president of 200 grant homeowners association. we're 240 homeowners in the south
7:20 am
beach neighborhood in supervisor kim's district. i would like to talk about three of the more egregious problems with how muni is not functioning in our neighborhood now and the problem that we don't see coming. first is capacity. you mentioned capacity at the start. i think you covered it l i would like to comment on the previous people talking about the importance of walking. we walk. we have no other choice. all other modes of transportation and clogged and on game days and try to go through the streets while carrying groceries or bringing small children home or dry cleaning, that type of thing. beyond the capacity problems if you look at the interface of muni with cal train muni is blocking the access to the
7:21 am
freeway of people trying to get off of the embarcadero whether by king or fourth street because of the pedestrians trying to get to the platform in the center of the boulevard. this will get much worse if we do the entertainment complex out on the bay because a lot of the game day pedestrians walk to the stadium. they will be flooding across to get to the platform. oops, i am out of time, so lastly it's time of day. these events are going to happen at night and in the evenings when the system is already overburdend and special events that run late at night, so we're talking about adding a demand on the system where muni has the least available assets to add at the time it's completely buried and i hope that you consider this carefully in considering that. >> thank you very much. is there any additional public comment on item number two?
7:22 am
ms. hester. >> sue hester. i would hope that you would ask for a map that shows where the transit fee was paid and the same map in the same time probably 30 years where development has happened. you will find the problems when you had the map. i have it in my head. no one funded the pand and -- expansion that was called for in the mission direct or in the massive development there. we had a really rawkrous discussion for years by the m mta and the planning commission and prop 13 passed we started to lose money for transit, and one of the things that came out of that was a transportation impact development fee, and fees were put on downtown development. i
7:23 am
am not as sang quinn as others that the eastern developments solved the problem. the eastern developments process kicked the can down the road. do we have a solution for folsom street? no. was it a priority for everyone in the process eastern and western soma? yes. then 14 is an abomination down mission street. nothing moved. mission street doesn't have decent service. additionally the one thing missing from every transportation seen that i have ever seen is a map of the hills of san francisco. until you grasp the fact they're limited ways to get around the city because the mountains are in the way and the east is bay fill you have a transit system and mind set that everything is flat and
7:24 am
everything is walkable and bikable and it's not true and the transit system needs to be adjusted for that. thank you. >> thank you very much. is there any additional public comment on item two? yes, please come forward. >> hi thank you very much. i am alice rogers, a resident in south park, and i want to thank you so much for holding this hearing. it's long over due, and all of the salient points have been made. i just want to support the need and the rincon south beach mission bay south park central corridor neighborhoods, the need, the absolute need to solve these problems. so far it seems like our neighborhoods have been looked at revenue stream and density bonus and not considered as people. we really need
7:25 am
this. thank you. >> thank you very much. is there any additional public comment on item number two? seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues thank you for participating in today's hearing and to all members of the public who came forward and the departments that presented. this is an ongoing conversation about the future of transportation in san francisco, and how we're going to insure that our transportation system meets the needs of our growing city so with that supervisor kim i would like to continue this item to the call of the chair. >> i will make that motion to continue the item to the call of the chair. >> okay. we can take that without objection. thank you. madam clerk can you please call item three. >> item three is amending the mission alcoholic beverage special use district and transfer of liquor licenses and cell alcohol for off sight
7:26 am
consumption and grocery stores and certain uses in the valencia street controls and restrict conversion of ground floor retail to restaurants. >> thank you. supervisor campos and i are the co-authors of item three so i would like to turn it over to supervisor camp campos for additional remarks. >> great. thank you very much mr. chairman. first let me thank you and your staff and andre powers and my legislative aide nathan and we have been working on this for quite some time and i appreciate the very collaborative nature of this under taking. as some folks maybe aware the mission currently has the oldest special use district, specifically a special use district the mission called special use district which was originally established back in the early 1990's to
7:27 am
address the issue of proliferation and clustering of businesses serving alcohol throughout the mission. the special use district that was created was in response to community efforts to address that problem and calls by the community that we in city government do something. the special use district that has been in place this whole time covers all of the mission as well as the neighborhoods of lawinga and it has been for the last 17 years unchanged, and in the last few years -- in fact since i was elected to my office and supervisor wiener since you have been elected as well, we have heard from a number of community folks, not only businesses, residents, for us to look -- to take a look back at
7:28 am
what the special use district is and whether or not there is a need to tweak it. let me actually note that it's only fitting that supervisor zane jane is also in committee because for a time when she was -- when her district, district 6, include the north mission, this is an issue that we also talked to her about from both offices, so a while back my office working with supervisor wiener developed a year long community and stakeholders process that basically brought people together from the entire neighborhood and got community input whether or not changes should be made, and i think that it's fair to say there was a wide range of opinions from people who feel and felt that special use districts should remain as is to people that believe that special use district should be eliminated and what we have here in this
7:29 am
piece of legislation is an ordinance that strikes a balance between the different comments we received. it doesn't eliminate the special use district but it does update it in such a way it allows new community based entrepreneurship while at the same time continuing to regulate alcohol because we know that the issue of proliferation of alcohol remains an issue in the mission. without going into the specifics of the legislation some of the points that are included that it allows for neighborhood grocery stores to sell limited amounts of beer and wine. it improves the ability of current business owners to make repairs, renovations and become ada compliant. it allows transfers within the special use district so those are some of the changes this makes and i think that
7:30 am
this is another example of how it is appropriate from time to time to revisit some of the changes -- some of the laws that are passed and see whether or not changes are needed. we believe this piece of legislation strikes the right balance based on the different feedback that we received. i am very proud of the legislation. i want to thank also the members of the community who have been involved in this process throughout the neighborhood including the valencia corridor, 24th street, the mission corridor, people from all over the neighborhood have commented, and lastly once again thank nadal from my office and supervisor wiener and your staff for your work. >> thank you supervisor campos and also i had a few remarks. i'm actually very excited that we're here today with this legislation. it has been years over